Carter is tool...for evil.

fiery celt...I have to agree.

The key point about Jimmy Carter is that, rather than malevolent or even stupid, the man is simply ... very, very weak.

Weak, gullible, maleable... but well intentioned. Like most useful idiots.

Anyone know if a transcript of the entire Carter "speech" is available, instead of just these ridiculous quotes? I wouldn't mind reading all he had to say.

Beating up on Carter is getting old. He's predictably stupid. It's like beating up on Fisk. You just roll your eyes and say, "Here we go again".

Go away, Jimmy. Just go away.

Carter illustrates liberal idiocy at its finest: Deep down, everybody is just a big cuddly teddy bear. The only reason people use terrorism is because of desperation and unmet needs for understanding and hugs. Greed, hatred, lust for power, seething resentment...these are attributes only of the victims of terrorism, not of its perpetrators.

No wonder he's the Chairmen Emeritus of the Idiot Left People's Collective.

Truly depraved - "fences are main obstacles to peace". I guess thats why there was peace until Israel decided to build the fences. I guess if you want to be honored by the peoples of Europe (Nobel Prizes, etc.) you had better blame the Jew for the ils of the world.

#3

Well intentioned for who or whom?

It is like saying he is for peace. But peace on who's terms?

I am beginning to doubt many of these people are even well intentioned anymore

Carter is basically making 2004 a lock for W.

"Dammit, George! Why won't you lie back, close your eyes, and take it?!?"

I posted this in the thread below, but it seems to be more at home here.

Has there ever been a nerdier, needier, more insufferable President than Carter? So earnest, so falsely compassionate, he makes Bill "I feel your pain" Clinton seem like Ebenezer Scrooge. I have a distinct memory of Jhimmi in his "casual guy" cardigan, self-loathing oozing out of every pore, informing the American people that they were suffering from a "malaise". He was too dim to realize that he was the one who had caused it--him and his santimonous, defeatist, "I have lusted in my heart" dampness. Amazing how quickly Reagan dispelled the malaise once Carter had left.

And remember his yahoo family--Billy, the rurally in-bred Jew-hater and professional drunkard; the gaga mother who looked about 103; the evangelist sister; not to mention Amy, who, like most of the family, was cruelly passed over by the Beauty Fairy?

Why is anyone still listening to this guy? He loathes Israel--always has--and has absolutely nothing of any value to contribute to the debate. Unless, of course, you want another recitation of what everyone except the UN, the EU, Kofi Annan and Yasser Arafat are doing wrong.

Malaise, my ass.

he has to be a decent man; after all, he builds houses

Dhimmi is a malevolent antisemite. I'll give a Dhimmiesque grimace grin when he pushes daisies and no, it won't be in tribute.

Well, give it a month, there is still time for someone else to come out as a bigger idiot.

Though, I still think Howard Dean is the likely front runner this year. But that might be a year early for him. We'll have to wait till Janurary to see.

Sorry, but I can't go that far (celt). Carter is a dude that truely, utterly and to the core, believes that negotiation, creative compromise, and a balance of trade-off's are necessary to achieve peace. In truth, I find these laudable as well - but only theoretically

Sadly, these are the 'olive branches' that are held in high esteem by the Europeans, as being the one-and-only way to gain peace in the Palestinian issue. Unfortnately (and I mean that - unfortunately), the diametrically opposed societies are simply unfit to carry on this kind of dialog, and make it work. The Jewish are blinded by their Zionism, the neoPalestinians by their trumped up rhetoric about Rights to Return and so on.

I wish it were a "Carter's World", just as I wish it were something that the U.N. could handle, or the European Union could mediate to a successful conclusion. We all then could have less GDP spent on the world's strongest and most formidible military, and possibly more for the wealth of the populus. This is not to be.

The true nature of the peoples involve is comples, but will not be appeased by Carteresque diplomacy. The Jewish peoples rightly have a meme, a societal vision of attaining a self-controlled homeland, where Jews can be free from persecution, which has haunted them for thousands of years. The neoPalestinians are deeply entrenched, poorly educated, poorer in monies, and "marginal" from an Israeli point of view. They've been offered a dozen or more times "deals" to exchange land-for-peace or any number of alternatives. The Arab neighbors aren't the least bit amused by it all, and wish to see endless conflict. Gives al Jazeera something to fuss about, something other than the price of worm-eaten dates over mint tea in the hazoosh.

No, Israel has learned the hard way, that to beat the squit out of its neighbors does NOT ensure that they're going to sit back, and give up the battle. 1967, 1973 were enough to show that. Even the "peace" bought with Egypt cost Egypt an assassination (as well as Israel, if one gets right down to it), and hardly won the peace.

Carter is a weak man, only in his utter unwillingness to "pull the trigger", even when it was the most humane thing to do. And that is the philosophically rotten underbelly of so many unrepentent pacifists.

GoatGuy

Screw J.C. IMHO he's another fossil, just like arafish... that refuses to cross the "rainbow bridge".

#8 Jacob LaRow

It is like saying he is for peace. But peace on who's terms?

My Politics teacher recently asked me about the Geneva accords...

Politics teacher: Have you heard of this other peace plan?

Me: Ah, the Geneva thingie?

PT: Yes, that's right. What do you think of it?

Me: I think it's the stupidest thing to come out of the Israeli Left in a decade, and that's saying something.

PT: ...but you don't like the violence, do you?

My teacher isn't a bad person, though a bit of a tool. The point is that some people are naive enough to think that a peace plan will work, simply because it is called a peace plan.

---

Speaking of the Fiskie awards, can someone be nominated two years running? As it stands, Jimmy will be holder until he dies.

Carter is a typical case of an intelligent person and a complete idiot at the same time. Similar specimens are frequently found at the universities and colleges. Intelligent idiots -> idiotarians?

Yes, yes--the people who pay attention to Carter often put down Bush and his "cowboy" ways, but they give all credibility in the world (and a Nobel prize) to a Georgian peanut farmer. Hmph.

So let's see if I have this straight: The "settlers" are an obstacle to peace because Jews shouldn't be allowed to live on "Palestinian" land. The 4 million refugees are an obstacle to peace because Palestinians should be allowed to live on Jewish land in exchange for the Arab world's recognition of Israel's right to exist.

Charles, you might want to rethink your position on Carter's terminal stupidity.

Besides, Carter is a liar, perfectly willing to assert a falsehood because to admit otherwise would make him look bad:

Carter said that not a single word of the peace he negotiated between Israel and Egypt has been violated.

Well Mr. Carter, why isn't an Egyptian ambassador in Israel? Why does Egypt's antisemitic incitement in the state-controlled media -- which the 'peace' treaty bans -- continue unabated?

The bigots are at it again making claims that the Jews control america. Well I have a different view. Using simple to use graphic I can easily show the reality.

Bigots with old claims

F%&K YOU JIMMY!

Why is anyone still listening to this guy? He loathes Israel--always has--and has absolutely nothing of any value to contribute to the debate.

You ask then answer your own question. He shares the values of the idiotarian left... who also have nothing of value to contribute to the debate.

#21 David Simon

Charles, you might want to rethink your position on Carter's terminal stupidity.

Not so fast. Israel, being the stronger party, has a moral obligation to make the most concessions, and make them first.

/carter

Most people forget that while Carter was nowhere near as big a media hog post-presidency as Clinton has been, he came out with several bitter snipes about Reagan Administration policies in the years immediately after the 1980 election, so this Nixonian nasty streak isn't some post-9/11 thing that Jimmy has just come upon. He has a huge ego and has always felt that lesser people have gotten the credit unjustly while his political actions have been the brunt of 25 years of scorn by Republicans and 25 years of intentional amnesia by his own party, which likes to pretend the Begin-Sadat meeting was the only thing Carter ever did in the White House.

"Jimmy Carter? He's the world's greatest monster!"
---Barney Gumble

OT: Arutz Sheva describes, perfectly, the UN's role in the Arab Israeli conflict, in cartoon form.

sigh... "History's great monster"

"Without a resurrection of strong and unbiased American influence, Israeli and Palestinian extremists will prevail.

Notice how he equates "Israeli extremists and Palestinian extremists." It's apparent that he considers Sharon and his followers to be morally equivalent to Arafat and his suicide bombers--an absolutely repugnant stand, to say the least.

Carter is of the same cloth as Chamberlain. He is not just weak, he is a moral coward. For him there is never a time for martial force, it's always talk talk talk, plead, beg and grovel.

This is no man I would want in my foxhole!

The scariest aspects of Carter's positions is that he's a USNA graduate, and one of his assignments was as a nuclear engineering officer on a submarine. That means he's a bubblehead, folks; he proves that more and more each day his life extends. Maybe his experience with nuclear reactors ("I didn't blow up the ship, so why would Iran/NK/etc. want to risk nuclear war?") gives him a self-perceived advantage in discussing the matter. But for my money, he can go, with Habitat For Humanity, and pound sand with his hammer as he erects appropriate housing for the Paleos: Sand castles for the religiously delusional.

Carter should read these words from Omar, an Iraqi blogger:

This morning I was discussing the tragic accident of yesterday where
seven Spanish officers were killed with my friends (Zeyad and A.Y.S).
We were all angry, distressed and frustrated.
I felt ashamed to face my readers again. I even was thinking about giving up the whole blog. thing, but I decided to write, not for any purpose, but to relieve the pressure in my chest.

I was watching the news about the accident on the networks, and I was shocked to see some barbarians celebrating the death of those officers, but the most terrible scene was that when one of those barbarians stepped over the dead bodies singing a song praising the Ba’ath.
I could not utter a word and I remained silent for a long while thinking of the families of the victims watching their loved ones, killed and disfigured.
I wanted to cry, but the tears froze in my eyes.
I wished I could get there to kill those animals.
They were not real Iraqis, they were not even human beings, and they don't deserve to live neither in Iraq nor anywhere else.
Please do not misjudge the Iraqi people.
I asked myself a question: is that the way they say thanks to the brave men and women who left their homes and families to help us start a free, safe and prosperous Iraq?
Well…I guess this is not the right question to ask, because those criminals do not want Iraq to become free, they will use all evil to stop the progress in Iraq, they want to damage the reputation of the Iraqi people, they will continue to target Iraqis and coalition troops.
As for us, we should not stand by and watch, we should do our best to stop this evil plan.
I’m asking every honest man and woman and every honest government in the world to give a hand.
This is not a USA vs. Saddam battle.
And not an Iraqi people vs. Ba’athists battle.
This is the war of the free world against terrorism.
This is a war between all the good and all the evil.
If this is what they call resistance, and if this is what they call patriotism, then I am the first betrayer.
People of the world: you can not stay neutral, we're all on the (list).

[Link: iraqthemodel.blogspot.com...]

Israel also knows just what Omar means about "a war between all the good and all the evil."

Seems that ol' Dhimmi is suffering from a severe case of cranial-rectal inversion, brought on by a room-temperature intelligence forced to do something past "strike flat part of nail with flat part of hammer until nail flat with wood." I mean, this guy is the perfect example of why the Left is an endangered species: he doesn't know when to admit he's wrong, but will not hesitate a second to find/create a fault in another's actions.

#31 Yossarian

It's apparent that he considers Sharon and his followers to be morally equivalent to Arafat

If only! Carter has an abiding respect for Arafat.

Carter is worse than weak. He has wilfully imposed on himself a moral blindness, and that is malevolent.

He is worse than Clinton. Clinton is selfish and weak. He gave in to weakness (for bimbos, lies etc) Carter repressed all that--he lusted only in his heart. He is repressed, mean-spirited, and sanctimonious.
He can't let his mean-spiritedness show, except when it is politically sanctioned--as against Israel.

I'd have a beer with Clinton. I wouldn't believe a word he'd say, but it could be lively. But not with preachy Jimmy.

What an annoying pin head this man is. If I had a European audience to listen to me I'd tell them that we are embarrassed that this man was ever our President.

Carter: Here is my plan for freeing the hostages. We take seven army helicopters and crash them in the Iranian desert.
Cabinet: And then what.
Carter: No, thats it.

And while were at it let's thank Bubba for the work he's done in North Korea.

Who cares? this whole Geneva "peace plan" will go up in flames (quite literally, as recent events have shown in the West Bank and Gaza). Yasser Arafat will not tolerate anyone undercutting his authority or stewardship over the Palestinian people. Those Palestinians who are signing onto it are signing their own death warrants.

Got an Op-Ed here from Jimmy Carter on 3 Nov, 2003.

Title: Op-Ed: Middle East Accord Offers 'Best' Chance for Peace

Here's a sample:

Determined negotiators

For more than two years, the group of Israelis and Palestinians, many of whom played key roles at earlier discussions under President Clinton at Camp David and later at Taba, Egypt, has held difficult, tedious negotiations. Working without government support, both sides have made constructive concessions without contradicting the concepts of the Oslo accords of 1993, the Clinton proposals and the Quartet road map.

For folks who need a refresher on Carter, it's Carterpalooza!

#40 LightTower

both sides have made constructive concessions without contradicting the concepts of the Oslo accords of 1993, the Clinton proposals and the Quartet road map.

To the contrary, the Geneva accords fit in well next to the other failed peace plans.

#39 Dirk Diggler

I'm afraid I disagree. Those Palestinians are acting as agents of Arafat. The Geneva thing is another in a long line of measures intend to chink away at Israel's armor; the agreement has Israel giving up the Temple Mount, it's soul, and accepting an unspecified number of refugees and pulling back to the indefensible Armistice Lines of 1949, it's body. The point of this plan is to be imprinted on the minds of Israelis and to become mainstream, it is to boil the frog in the water (e.g., Israel) just a bit more.

Carter Speech = Verbal Flatulence

He could have at least said, "Excuse me" after fouling the world's air with his stench.

People who don't care if Israel survives think that any talks are better than no talks, that any agreeement, however detrimental to Israel's future, is better than no agreement. Since, clearly, Carter falls into this camp (or this Camp David), we can expect to hear more from him in the days ahead.

Doesn't mean we have to listen.

The two main architects of this initiative, Yossi Beilin and Yasser Abed Rabbo, will discuss their "blueprint" on Wednesday in DC, in a "briefing" sponsored by the Brookings Institution's Saban Center, and moderated by the Center's director, Martin Indyk.

Carter did some good with Habitat for Humanity. Why the FUCK can't he stick with that!?

Carter is the only Democrat that I ever voted for, for President.
Within 2 years I wanted to cut the offending hand off. Then Nightline would come on and every night I had to be reminded how impotent the United States was, because we could not just go in and take our diplomats back from the Iranian skum.
Thank God for Ronald Reagan sending that peanut farmer back to Georgia.
Carter's foreign policy has crippled this country for the last 25 years. Like so many liberals he believes in how things should be not what they are. It seems impossible for him to believe in Evil.
The man is a dangerous fool and history will probably be kinder to Richard Nixon than it will ever be to Jimmy Carter

This was probably posted here long before I ever showed up, but just in case --

Here is Jay Nordlinger on Carter a few years ago. (See link at the end if you have time for the whole piece. It's worth it.)

"In The Unfinished Presidency, Brinkley writes, “There was no world leader Jimmy Carter was more eager to know than Yasir Arafat.” The former president “felt certain affinities with the Palestinian: a tendency toward hyperactivity and a workaholic disposition with unremitting sixteen-hour days, seven days a week, decade after decade.” Neat, huh?

At their first meeting — in 1990 — Carter boasted of his toughness toward Israel, assuring Arafat at one point, “. . . you should not be concerned that I am biased. I am much more harsh with the Israelis.” Arafat, for his part, railed against the Reagan administration and its alleged “betrayals.” Rosalynn Carter, taking notes for her husband, interjected, “You don’t have to convince us!” Brinkley records that this “elicited gales of laughter all round.” Carter himself, according to Brinkley, “agreed that the Reagan administration was not renowned as promise keepers” (this, to Arafat)."

[Link: www.nationalreview.com...]

I really can't take the Nobel Peace Prize seriously any more. Arafat and Carter. . .what a joke.

I wrote the assistant nuclear enlisted personnel manager at the Pentagon about the dreaded USS Jimmy Carter-

It is true!

> Ed,
>
> Sorry to say, but it's true. If it makes you feel any better, it's not
> because of his accomplishments as POTUS, per se. It's because he's the only
> nuclear trained officer ever to rise to that exhalted office. I know, that's
> probably not a very good reason, but there you have it. Feel any better?
>

Without a resurrection of strong and unbiased American influence, Israeli and Palestinian extremists will prevail

Sorry, Dhimmi, but on Israeli side Beilin and his likes are the extremists.

#41!! You beat me to it!!

#26 Colt - LOL! And for all intents and purposes he says it when he opines that the major flaw of the "road map" is its step-by-step approach.

GoatGuy #16,

Unfortnately (and I mean that - unfortunately), the diametrically opposed societies are simply unfit to carry on this kind of dialog, and make it work. The Jewish are blinded by their Zionism, the neoPalestinians by their trumped up rhetoric about Rights to Return and so on.

I'm not sure I follow what you mean. Exactly how are the Jews blinded by Zionism? Zionism, you may recall, is the movement that suggests that Jews have a right to their own state. Also, even if you mean expansionism, for which there is precious little evidence, it's hard to set up a symettry between one party being expansionist (the Jews) and the other party abnegating their existence (the demand of return by the Jordyptians).

The Jewish peoples rightly have a meme, a societal vision of attaining a self-controlled homeland, where Jews can be free from persecution

Incidentally, that's what Zionism is.

No, Israel has learned the hard way, that to beat the squit out of its neighbors does NOT ensure that they're going to sit back, and give up the battle. 1967, 1973 were enough to show that.

Actually, there's little evidence for this. After each war, one of the Arab parties decided that they had enough. In 1967, Jordan's losses were convincing. 1973 convinced Egypt. 1982 convinced Syria. Finally, at least until the present, the Arab states have not launched a conventional war against Israel in the last twenty years - so there is actually a great deal of evidence (contrary to what you wrote) that beating "the squit" out of its neighbors has been successful for Israel.

Even the "peace" bought with Egypt cost Egypt an assassination (as well as Israel, if one gets right down to it), and hardly won the peace.

Are you trying to link Rabin's assassination to the Camp David accords?

--All that said, I generally agree with your points w/r/t Carter's feebleness.

OT
Games to Watch This Weekend!

Cowboys at Philadelphia
Miami at New England
Cinncinnati at Baltimore
Redskins at New York Giants

Granted, the best thing in the world is football in snow and/or ice, ala Oakland-New England in the playoffs, or the Leon Lett Turkey Bowl of 1993 in Dallas.

But torrential rain blown by 50 mph winds is the next best thing.

Oakland at Pittsburgh, not as much wind, but a chance for snow. Ditto the J-E-T-S Jets, Jets, Jets at Buffalo.

The Geneva Hillbilly:

Come and listen to a story 'bout a man named Jhim.
Rich peanut farmer who has always been quite dhim.
Has a lot to say about the mess in the Mid-East.
And thinks he has a way to impose a brand new peace--
Jews must lose,
Settlements,
Lots o' land.
Now the first thing you know old Jim's in Switzerland.
Stickin' in his nose as you can understand.
He's has a lot of practice and he knows just what to do--
"Everything'll work when you screw a Jew or two."

really OT: Security guard found shot at U.N. headquarters

[Link: www.boston.com...]

Carter, for some reason, accepts virulent Arab antisemitism as a given, and thus does not view incessant Egyptian incitement against Israel as a violation of the treaty that he pressured Begin to sign, or incessant Palestinian incitement against Israel as being antithetical to a peaceful settlement.

Maybe he is not antisemitic himself; maybe he is the sort of bigot that considers Arabs subhuman and their bigotry therefore excusable. Charles Jacobs wrote a fantastic article on this phenomenon late last year which Charles headlined.

“Is this man Carter just terminally stupid, or evil?”
Actually, he's simply feeding at the Saudi trough, and this is the type of services for which one gets paid by the oil ticks.

"Back in October 1983 [Saudi] Adnan Kashogii...footed the $50,000 bill at a New York City benefit for Jimmy Carter's presidential repository in Atlanta. Six months earlier, the former president and future Nobel Peace Prize winner had sung the kingdom's praises at a Saudi trade conference held in Atlanta." Sleeping With the Devil: How Washington Sold Its Soul for Saudi Crude, by former CIA Middle East operative Robert Baer, p. 64

"In December 1997 Jimmy and Rosalyn Carter joined Bush Sr. at [Saudi prince] Bandar's Potomac River mansion to help celebrate the twenty-fifth anniversary of the prince's marriage to Princess Haifa." Ibid, p. 66

(actually I'm on a typing roll here, so lets add this non-Carter related nugget...)

"In April 2001 Yasir Arafat called Saudi Crown Prince 'Abdallah to complain after Israeli soldiers fired on a convoy ferrying officials of the Palestinian Authority. (Equal-opportunity favor doers, the Saudis pick up Arafat's hotel tab whenever his entourage overnights in Washington - generally at the Ritz-Carlton, where the Carlyle Group was holding its annual meeting when American Airlines 77 slammed into the Pentagon.) 'Abdallah in turn called Bandar, who called Dick Cheney, who called Colin Powell, who once was Bandar's racquetball partner. (Powell and Bandar came to know each other back in the late 1970s through David Jones, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and anothe of Bandar's racquetball buddies.) Within an hour of Arafat's call from Prince 'Abdallah, Powell was reading the riot act to Ariel Sharon in Tel Aviv. Tinkers to Evers to Chance was never so efficient." Ibid p. 66

Yo, Colt! Watch where you swinging that tar brush, okay?

That is a Jimmy Carter quotation. *I* can't help what the man say - I just reports it!

Whew! LOL

(I forgive you. Just keep that quote stuff attributed next time, okay? Gun safety on. Quote attribution on. Cool? Cool. *grin*)

#42 Colt 12/1/2003 02:16PM PST

#40 LightTower

"both sides have made constructive concessions without contradicting the concepts of the Oslo accords of 1993, the Clinton proposals and the Quartet road map. "

To the contrary, the Geneva accords fit in well next to the other failed peace plans.

#53 David Simon

And for all intents and purposes he says it when he opines that the major flaw of the "road map" is its step-by-step approach.

I suspect Carter's objection to the roadmap stems more from the idea of Arab concessions. The Arabs are the aggrieved party, the victims! Why should they give up the right to murder Jews?

OT:

If you liked Julie Burchill's recent attack on British anti-Semitism, you may also be interested in this column of hers, published less than four weeks before 9/11:

For quite a few years now, there has been a sustained effort on the part of the British media to present Islam - even after the Rushdie affair and now during the Taliban's reign of terror - as something essentially "joyous" and "vibrant"; sort of like Afro-Caribbean culture, only with fasting and fatwas. Just last week, the BBC's Kate Clark, the first female correspondent to be sent to Afghanistan, said blandly, "The situation is a lot more complex than just thinking that the Taliban are bad. For example, they have eradicated opium poppy cultivation this year."

Yes, and this year they also had a woman and her 12-year-old daughter beaten to within an inch of their lives when the woman removed her daughter's burqa - that hideous mobile prison women have to wear in the street - in order to help her breathe during an asthma attack. So, yes, Kate, the Taliban are bad, and it's not complex at all.

...

While the history of the other religions is one of moving forward out of oppressive darkness and into tolerance, Islam is doing it the other way around. It is impossible that any Christian or Jewish country would suddenly start practising their fundamental religion as the Taliban have. And by 2025, the BBC informs us, a third of the world will be Muslim.

In the light of this, and the threat it poses to our human rights, I believe that mindless, ill-sorted Islamophilia is just as dangerous as mindless, ill-sorted Islamophobia. I know how dedicated it is to the cause of dumbing down, but the BBC really should try to take this amazingly complex notion on board.

#60 LightTower

LOL! Apologies :-)

At best, Carter is someone who, regardless of intention, misunderstands reality (I remember 20% inflation, price controls and long lines at the gas pump; Reagan took off price controls, prices dropped to the lowest level in years and the lines disappeared).

At worst (and I believe the worst about him), he should be renamed, "Dances With Dictators".

I make no claim about knowing the road to Hell, but Carter's direction gives us the road to Hell on Earth.

#56 Jed Clampett 12/1/2003 02:29PM PST

"The Geneva Hillbilly"

ROTFLMHO!!!

And it *scans* even! Wow! 8^D

The present administration in Washington has been invariably supportive of Israel and the well-being of the Palestinian people has been ignored or relegated to secondary importance

That's funny, I can recall dozens of times where the Bush administration has sided against Israel in policy and/or rhetoric. It's also been trying to get a peaceful democracy for the Jordyptians to live in, which is more than Jimmah ever tried to do in any realistic way. But since when have failures and lies been held againt liberals? Remember, they "care more" and "mean well."

Taranto gets some good licks in:

"Former President Jimmy Carter called the American invasion of Iraq one of the country's worst foreign policy blunders, and predicted it may take a dozen years to bring stability and democracy to the region," reports the State newspaper of Columbia, S.C. A dozen years? Hmm, Carter took office more than two dozen years ago; if the Middle East can be made stable and democratic in just a dozen years, it's a shame he didn't start the process back then.

The disgraced former president also says of Iraq, "I was strongly against going in unilaterally." He should call the families of the seven Spanish intelligence officers who died over the weekend in an Iraq ambush and deliver the comforting news that they didn't really lose their loved ones, since America is in Iraq "unilaterally."

Seriously, Israel needs to decide what the answer to all this is going to be, declare it, and back it up with force against any who'd oppose it. Up to and including overthrowing states in the region who won't play nice.

#32 quark2: At least Chamberlain came around pretty quickly for a pacifist when he was proven wrong. Not so Carter.

#63 Colt 12/1/2003 02:32PM PST

"#60 LightTower
LOL! Apologies :-) "

COOL!
LOL Accepted :^)

I need another Billy Beer after reading all this. It helps especially when I start to vomit.

#62 Kolya

From your article:

And by 2025, the BBC informs us, a third of the world will be Muslim.

Great, just great.

Where in the hell do these guys get the assumption they have the right to decide the fate of anyone? Especially a country they do not legally represent.
Now they are coming to this country with their sedition?
Their arrogance is outrageous!
I would love it if when they arrived in the U.S. they were denied entry!

Jimmy Carter was President of the United States of America when the Iranians took the American embassy in Iran. For how long? 444 days. So, what did he do to cause the Anti-American sentiment, because he was the Presidant-he was at the helm. He did nothing. So now he critisizes the Presidant that does something. It is a fact that Saudi was so concerned with the Iranian uprising, and they saw Jimmy Carter (the US) not stepping in to help the Shaw of Iran, that the Saudi's needed protection. The Saudi's created Wahabbism. So thank God we have a Presidant that is willing to protect American interest and allies of Democracy. It did'nt take 444 days to ignore the problem. Jimmy Carter needs to know that he was at the helm and did nothing so he is mostly responsible for Wahabbisim and the Anti-Americanism that we are having to deal with now.

Hey, Jimmy's got a point. Everyone has to compromise. The Arab extremists, who want to annihilate Israel, should compromise, and so should the Israeli extremists, who don't want to be annihilated.

My high school debate partner understood the concept. "I want to shoot you twice. You don't want me to shoot you at all. Let's compromise--I only shoot you once."

After all, relations between Palestinians and Jews were fine before the security fence was built...or before the settlements were establsihed...or before the 1967 war...or before 1948...or some time, surely. In any case, everyone knows there would be peace if the Israelis did something or other.

What's an Israeli extremist? I thought this weenie was supposed to be mr. peace. He is a F***kin hypocrite if I have ever seen one. I would love to put him and Bush alone together in a room then let him spew his panzy A** accusations.

Julie Burchell is a goldmine, isn't she?

#61 Colt - Murder Jews?! Try "resist occupation." If you are going to ape the paragon of geopolitics, remember the eupemisms young man!

#72 Alex Bensky

My high school debate partner understood the concept. "I want to shoot you twice. You don't want me to shoot you at all. Let's compromise--I only shoot you once."

Oh, I'm definitely going to borrow that one :-)

#58 Ben F

Maybe he is not antisemitic himself; maybe he is the sort of bigot that considers Arabs subhuman and their bigotry therefore excusable. Charles Jacobs wrote a fantastic article on this phenomenon late last year which Charles headlined.

A few months ago I asked an online adversary why is he fixated on Israel and appears not to care about Sudan. This was his candid admission:

On Sudan: I, being more accustomed to dissident politics, am more openly critical of actions that the country in which I live partakes in, because I have more of a chance of correcting the problems (formulated and plaguing) HERE, than I do as some foreigner decrying what some removed country is doing-this doesn't mean I support what they do, or don't care, I just largely concern myself with things the U.S. has a hand in. Chomsky, and nigh every other dissident as well.

I know that doesn't make a lick of sense. I'll translate:

"The reason why us LLLs don't give a crap about 2 million murdered and enslaved colored people in Sudan is because it isn't being done by a country that the U.S. is friends with".

OT: Big Iraq ambush 'was bank heist'

[Link: news.bbc.co.uk...]

Hmm...at least I can respect a bank hit...in an odd sort of way.

#75 David Simon

My mistake.

Perhaps the Palestinians are simply finding their oppression manifesting itself in increasingly violent acts?

Better?

From this page on the website of Meretz USA, I found a link to the official Geneva Initiative website.

Hebrew

English

I don't see any Arabic version. It is always important to look for "ambiguities" in the Arabic text that have been whitewashed clarified in translation, but for some reason Beilin and company do not seem to want to facilitate textual comparisons.

The document does not recognize the national right of Jewish people to have a State located on territory within the bounds of Mandatory Palestine. Under this agreement the Arabs can drive the Jews into the sea if the Jews refuse to decamp for Uganda. Pfeh!!!

@66 model4

That's true, he did admit his error. But the time used in appeasing the nazis just gave them that much more advantage in getting ready for their roll across europe.

Carterpalooza!

The hopelessness of Jimmy Carter.

The Carter Center: Follow the Arab Money

Jimmy Carter: The Untold Story

Jimmy Carter, Traitor?

Jimmy Carter: A tool or inherently evil?

#77 James

I just largely concern myself with things the U.S. has a hand in.

My disgust for those people knows no bounds.

I met Jimmy in 1975, before he was president. Had a nice talk. He seemed like a nice enough guy, but I've grown weary of defending him. I'm tired of saying, "Well, at least he didn't ruin the savings and loan industry the way Reagan did."

It may be true, but we've paid off the savings and load fiasco a long time ago, but we're still paying for his inaction in Iran in 1979.

My take on Jimmy is that, like the Bourbons of old, and the Arabs of today, he's learned nothing and forgotten nothing.

Speaking of the Rabin assasination, which perhaps could be tied to Oslo, but certainly not to Begin and Sadat's summit years earlier, perhaps if he hadn't been killed, he would have realized what a bill of goods he was sold at Oslo, and renounced it, rather than in death become some kind of martyr hero of Oslo.

My memories of the Carter administration, living up north ( before the move to Texas), after school job at the Cumberland Farms, and spending half my 15 hours a week changing the prices on all the stock there. The store would have cans of dog food or spam with eight or nine price stickers, laid one over another. Prices increased almost weekly. Bill Clinton and his worst depression since the 1930s crap showed what a liar he was, as one only had to go back twelve years to see what a really sick economy looked like.

Granted, we didn't have cruise missiles or smart bombs then, and Iran's F-14s and F-4s weren't in such a state of disrepair, but we had B-52s, FB-117 and several aircraft carriers with fighters and bombers.

I suspect this is basically what Reagan did do, and what Carter should have done, was give a deadline, and then commence bombing. Make it clear the bombing would get more intense if any harm came to the hostages. the target list would expand to Qum and all of Tehran. If the hostages were killed, implement a full "Rolling Thunder" conventional strategic bombing mission until the Ayatollah sued for peace or was killed.

We might have lost all 52 hostages, and dozens of airman might have been shot down. But radical Islam would have taken quite a hit.

I understand the former Soviet Union extended feelers to the US during the hostage crisis about splitting Iran. This probably was a little too similar to the Molotov-von Ribbentropp treaty for us to accept, but the Islamic Republic should have died in infancy.

BTW, to all you "we armed Saddam" people, 1) we didn't give him anywhere near the arms the French did and 2) he hadn't demonstrated to the world quite how dangerous he was twenty years ago. Iran was clearly the greater danger then, and while we might have wished we had done things differently in hindsight, it was the logical move at the time.

#83 Colt

My disgust for those people knows no bounds.

You said it. What a disgusting, amoral attitude. Usually they won't admit that it is all about America, after all its supposed to be all about human rights.

Colt #76,

#72 Alex Bensky

My high school debate partner understood the concept. "I want to shoot you twice. You don't want me to shoot you at all. Let's compromise--I only shoot you once."

Oh, I'm definitely going to borrow that one :-)

You're not the only one! That's a great analogy for all of the various peace farces for the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Too much of the goodness thing.

The first clue to Jimmy is his GOODNESS. It shines from his eyes. It radiates from his smile. He is kind, gentle, soft-spoken. He is a model citizen, husband, father. He loves, I mean really loves HUMANITY. Nobody, I mean nobody is bad or evil out there. People just stray from their path. Jimmy will help get them on it again.

So much goodness. Be very wary of it. Specially if it comes with a PR machine and volumes of mushy Hallmark poetry and now--a novel!
How will our Jimmy light up our lives next?

ronald reagan-senile-has better jugment than jimmuh the dimmuh

Does anyone know why the Geneva thing was mailed to every Israeli household and not to every Palestinian household?

I mean, I know why. But what is the official justification from Beilin et.al. for this obvious disparity?

PS The word Geneva means "thievery" in Hebrew, which is exactly what this plot tries to help Israel's enemies do to the Jews' ancestral homeland.

#79 Colt - Wow! Lack of personal responsibility, insousiance and a euphemism all in one compact statement. Carter couldn't have said it any better himself.

@78 Jewels [aka Justin]

Yes, they want to stop the circulation of the new money. They have been using the old to pay the terrorists to fight. See they won't do it for free.

#50 Ed Moran

re USS Jimmy

Well, I guess we can be thankful that he preferred the one that dives deep and remains out of sight.

"If I had a choice between a submarine and an airport, I'd choose a submarine." Jimmy Carter

Isn't it kind of sad that Jimmy's dad, his brother and his sister all died from pancreatic cancer, but somehow the defective gene missed him?

Makes one believe in the existence of Satan if one thinks about it too hard.

#54 / Ariel

Thanks for the reply. Yes, the very definition of Zionism is a Jewish-safe land of self-governance, in perpetuity. The "blinded by..." I was referring to was how some of the more fanatical factions are as determined to "take the whole" as the Paleo's are to push Israelis into the sea.

My goal was to say that neither side's fanatics have an argument of any significance that holds water against the opposite. Coexistence - as improbable as that seems - is the only central ground that works. Not to say that "coexistence" can't be enforced with a big ol' snakey wall, mind you. But "open air" coexistence has proven itself to be not working, since the ever-increasing population of 2nd and 3rd(!!!) generation "refugees" is without a doubt, the demographic bomb that could prove to be Israel's undoing.

Israel needs to gird itself well for the civil war that from what I can tell is all but unavoidable. No, they'll not go nuking anyone unless they get nuked, that is clear. After all, they still haven't even as much intimated that they do have those long-regarded secret nukes / South African tests. But that's their strategy: keep 'm wondering, keep their trigger finger just off the trigger.

-- -- -- -- -- -- --
with regard to your observation that actually Israel has learned that winning battles with its neighbors secures a kind of peace, I agree. What they remember though is that the same peoples that were held by the UN to not invade them, did, and repeated the mistake a second (third, or even fourth) time - depending on your view of history. They learned this lesson: we can never achieve a negotiated peace with our Islamic neighbors without first securing a whole passel of "honor" by beating the crap out of them on the battlefield. Then, and only then, will we get them to accede to this, that and the other kind of negotiated peace. And then ... ONLY in exchange for their war-lost lands, their real-estate-honor.

Now, what can Israel do with an indigie population that can have the squit beaten out of them, but who has neither the chattels, the estates, or the world support for negotiating a peace-for-spoils deal? It has been said, "Arafat is the chief impediment to the peace process in the Middle East". Well, this is as true as saying "This old cat makes the living room stink". Yes, it is so - and yet the aweful truth hidden under the surface is, Arafat still exists as the pointless mob-leader of the neoPalestinians because he truly reflects their 'body politic', their intransigence, their utter unwillingness taken faction by faction, to compromise, to release the Israelis from their indefinite war of attrition and terrorism. If he was anyone else, with any other more moderate, more accomodating point of view, he'd have been 6 feet under, 20 years ago, pushing up the poppies.

GoatGuy

Earth to Carter: FUCK YOU. And the camel you rode in on.

Carter should take some lessons from Monica Lewenski - much as I hate to say it, she at least fellated a better class of loser than the Eurojerks.

#19 marek

Carter is a typical case of an intelligent person and a complete idiot at the same time.

Yep. I remember Dennis Miller saying that IQ points were roughly 12th on the list of what he was looking for in a president.

#86 James

...after all its supposed to be all about human rights.

Pathetic, isn't it. That they can align themselves with the very worst of humanity, and claim they're for human rights... Morals, my ass.

#87 Ariel

I'm still a fan of Occasional Reader's comment on Arab-Israel negotiations:

The Arabs want to kill all the Jews. What do you suggest as a counter-offer? Half of the Jews?

And that's what it comes down to.

#91 David Simon

It isn't a skill I'll be showing off :-)

@85 Ed Moran

OT

Finally, Sanchez has done what he should have done earlier...talked about White's association with Lebanon and Saudia Arabia through the Wedge Group.
White is nothing more than a front money man for saudi .

Carter and Beilin were both thrown out of power by their respective electorates for doing stupid things.

Coincidence?

Nah!

#85 Ed Moran

BTW, to all you "we armed Saddam" people, 1) we didn't give him anywhere near the arms the French did and 2) he hadn't demonstrated to the world quite how dangerous he was twenty years ago. Iran was clearly the greater danger then, and while we might have wished we had done things differently in hindsight, it was the logical move at the time

But the Israelis realized Saddam's danger by taking out their French-built nuclear reactor at Osirak in June 1981.

But the Israelis realized Saddam's danger by taking out their French-built nuclear reactor at Osirak in June 1981.

That's because Saddam explicitly said he was building the reactor to acquire a nuclear arsenal which he would destroy Israel with. He said this openly and often.

The mistake the U.S. and others made (and continue to make) is thinking that someone who wants to destroy Israel isn't a threat to others besides Israel.

"These statements prove once again that Carter’s disastrous mishandling of the Iran hostage situation was no fluke; the man actually seems to believe that the way to deal with terrorism (and there’s some doubt that he even believes it exists) is to appease the terrorists. Another disgusting performance from a thoroughly disgusting man."

These pearls of wisdom from a washed out musician/computer nerd. Sure YOU are the expert on international policy making and political issues, compared to an ex-president and his bunch of political advisors. Stick to cleaning out the keyboard and leave the important stuff to the experts.

What an egomaniac!! Jeez Charles...SHUT UP. Stick with single digit IQ boy, currently in office. You are truly worthy of the Hick.

#16 Goat Guy
1. "The Jewish are blinded by their Zionism"

2. "The Jewish peoples rightly have a meme, a societal vision of attaining a self-controlled homeland, where Jews can be free from persecution, which has haunted them for thousands of years."

Which is it, 1. or 2.?
Or are you not aware of the the mutual contradiction in those 2 assertions?

And..."Jewish" is an adjective.
It's okay to say "Jew" & "Jews, y'know"; they aren't pejoratives except to those who speak the words with a sneer on their lips.

Are you not all that confident of your convictions or just new to the game?
(No sarcasm intended anywhere in the above.)

Hmm... Bush is a joker. Charles is a washed out musician and a nerd. So what are you? A looser? Is that a sufficient qualification to pass judgment on politics?

An interesting postscript thought...

It has been said that the inseperability of Islam and Islamic governance (and how it rules that all Arab/Muslim lands are on equal basis, so that any Muslim may travel to any Islamic country freely, live there, leave, what have you) is such that there is no distinction for any country in the Islamic world, except by virtue of leadership, local sociological norms, and the type of fleas that infest the camels. (I made that last part up)

OK, fine. Why then is Gaza and the West Bank considered lands harboring "refugees"? Refugees from war, I can understand that. But if they're in Islamic lands, are they not free to emigrated to any other Islamic land, as they wish? Are they not even welcome and encouraged to do so? No. The political neoPalestinians are just pawns, who, like the faceless yet carefully distressed-for-the-show public 'street people', are there to pluck the "UNFAIR!" strings of LLL's, to get their hand-outs, and to keep things rolling just as they are.

Well... the Jordanians took in a few hundred thousand "Palestinians" into the East Bank following the devastating 1967 war, only to eject them harshly and bodily, due to their intransigence. Odd... how the homies of Palestine couldn't even get along with their beneficent hosts. I was shocked. Shocked! I tell you.

GoatGuy

If I had to guess-- as regards motivation, I would say that Jimmy Carter is morally stupid- and terminally so.

In terms of results, the distinction between the deadly results of terminal stupidity in all its variants and the deadly results of evil are hard to distinguish.

In terms of quantitative analysis, I have no doubt that the terminally stupid make by far the greatest contribution to the Historical List of Deadly Results.

A good rule of thumb is "never attribute unto evil what can be accounted for by stupidity"

Rarely getting the recognition they deserve, a fair and objective consideration would note that the Truly Evil People would never have been able to achieve their place in history without these unsung but ever so useful idiots.

Jhimmi is the poster child for the American Left. Who's old enough here to remember the double digit inflation, oil shortages, and foreign policy disasters of the Carter administration? I am. The sad thing is that while Reagan has an excuse for his senility (Alzheimers), Carter has none.

Turning OT:

1) Did anyone read the NYT's perverted love fest with Syrian dictator Al-Assad? They write more wicked things about GW than they do Assad. The NYT's proves once again that the media is the press office for terrorists.

2) Who read about Israel's voluntary withdrawl of their resolution calling for the protection of Israeli children after the Arabs tried loading it with poison ammendments?

Amr Roshdy, first secretary of Egypt's mission to the United Nations, defended the amendments, saying, "What's hostile about calling for peace for all children in the Middle East?" He added, "The U.N. does not have double standards. Simply, the Israel children have their government to protect them. . What do the Palestinian children have?"

U.S. representative Walid Maalouf told the committee, "This episode will only bolster the belief that the United Nations continues to be biased and imbalanced" concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Adopting the Israeli resolution would have "redressed the imbalance" caused by Palestinian resolution. The United States opposed that draft because, he said, "We did not want to see the issue of children politicized," which this text did because it "singled out one group of children."

Evaritse's Zaide

Sorry 'bout that misaproprops ... I certainly know "jewish" is an adjective, got a phone call when typing the comment, I meant to type "jewish peoples". Read the above vis a viz the 1/vs/2 argument. I think I spelled out what I was trying to say.

GoatGuy
PS: I am new at this. I'll try to take most all reasoned and reasonable advice, thanks!

#104

Sure YOU are the expert on international policy making and political issues, compared to an ex-president and his bunch of political advisors.

By your unreasonable and fundamentally antidemocratic suggestion that one cannot criticize presidents or ex-presidents with more experience than you -- how do you justify criticizing President Bush, who surely has more experience than you, to say nothing of his advisors?

fack it--"judgment"--preview mongol--also bushisjoker-take your smegma infested brain cells and go away--GAZE

A great factor in Carter's constant Israel bashing is his desperate need to be appreciated, remembered and loved. He was so bad as a President and so handilly defeated, that he has spent all of the years since trying to find causes where he can get the most publicity as a "man of goodwill". He got some for his house building (a good thing), and then became the favorite of world leaders to serve as an overseer of elections (not so sure he did too well in that). Then he found what so many others have found - blame Jews (i.e., Israel) for all of the world's troubles - and has latched onto that to get the Nobel Prize. Like so many of us, I wondered how people here in America could sit back as event unfolded in Nazi Germany before the Holocaust, but so many are just doing the same now. It really is getting scary.
By the way, is it true that Howard Dean and Usama and Sadaam have been having secret peace talks (overseen by Carter) and have agreed that in return for Usama and Sadaam's pledge to a temporary hudna the US would give them Afghanistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Vermont? I thought I saw something about it at Reuters (or was it the BBC or the Guardian).

Alright Charles, we give: who/where is Bushisajoker? He's not the same nutjob ranting about xml validation or whatever, is he?

Jeez Charles...SHUT UP.

It's Charles' website and this guy is telling him to shut up? What a twat.

#110 Goat Guy
"PS: I am new at this. I'll try to take most all reasoned and reasonable advice, thanks!"

Fair enough!

And what's with the nik? Do you raise them (they give delicious milk) or are you a fan of SNL?

#88 & 109

The guy's been hoodwinked, plain and simple. As a fellow Christian, I applaud his support for helping "the downtrodden" (cf. Habitat for Humanity). But he tries to extend these beliefs to the world stage, and makes Christians (and therefore Americans) look like doormats in the process. Shame. Much better to call "a spade a spade", like other more relevant Christians we know. Jimmy Carter: PA/Hamas/IJ Dhimmi Extraordinaire. I remember the day he left office...little did we know the danger he'd continue to pose.

Carter was never too bright, but I think it's old age that made him what he is today. It's our job to make sure that another Jimmy Carter doesn't get into the White House.

@104 bushisajoker

You are the joke...and your IQ is showing in single digits.
You wouldn't qualify as mentally challenged.
So...why don't you shut up.

Misguided...terminally stupid?

Even a cretin with an IQ of 42 and no experience would occasionally say something right at least once in a while the same way a stopped clock tells time correctly twice a day.
Carter has a perfect record in the anti-America & anti-Israel area.
My conclusion: He is a smart, well-educated (nuclear physics) and well-informed. He is also a black-hearted scoundrel.
He didn't come from nowhere (Georgia) with the full backing of the Tri-lateral Commission for no reason.
He was carefully vetted by & has never dissappointed his mentors.

#115--zuluhoney--roflmao---you're calling the guy a twat--do you know what that means--does it mean something else in afrikaans--i can't catch my breathe--classic :-]

Evaritse's Zaide

Don't really know where the GoatGuy handle came from - some fool at a geek site was constantly trolling my opinions as "blowing goats", so I figured, what the heck. GoatGuy is just fine. Cool animals too. Great cheese.

GoatGuy

#115 Zulubaby
"What a twat."

I don't think that word means what you think it means.
(I've been waiting forever to type that!)

I think you meant "twit".

I hope you did 'cause twats are kinda nice.

ROFLMAO at my own humor...I must be getting punchy from the long work hours!

gawd--"breath"--preview hell

"Bushisajoker" is posting from Waterloo, Ontario. And someone will indeed "shut up," though it won't be me; I've had enough of this moron's mindless venom.

HULUGU (#122)

does it mean something else in afrikaans

No :-)

@122 HUGULU

Well at least she didn't call him a 'fish'! *LOL

If Carter were still president he would be appeasing the Eye-A-Tollas in Iran by negotiating for the US hostages TO THIS DAY.

Carter's credibility on matters relating to effectively dealing with terrorists is zilch. Carter and his presidency was hyjacked and held captive by the Islamist fruitcakes in Iran. So who do you expect a defacto victim of Stockholm Syndrome to side with anyhow? And oh you bet he suffers from Stockholm Syndrome all right. So he's gonna naturally side with the terrorists...not with Israel.

zb--when you said "what a twat"--i had an image of betty davis saying "what a dump"--but i think you meant what you said--the guy's definitely not just a twit but a major twat also--you can look it up

Mikhail Gorbachev is also in Geneva along with a few other old and miserable politicians of the past, all gathered there in a futile effort to remind the world that they still exist. Pink Floyd's "fletcher memorial home" comes to mind

Take all your overgrown infants away somewhere
and build them a home a little place of their own
the fletcher memorial
home for incurable tyrants and kings

And they can appear to themselves every day
on closed circuit TV
to make sure they're still real
It's the only connection they feel

#126 Charles
"And someone will indeed "shut up," though it won't be me;"

Good man!!!
I don't mind nearly so much when trolls, snotgurgles & other assorted dwellers under bridges attack us reg'lars as I do when they turn on you. I know other LGFers feel the same way. It's as though we've declared you off limits.
Not that you aren't fully capable of industrial strength bitch slapping somebody when they need it.

Zaide (#123)

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Where's Colt? He usually understands me. Anyway, that slime deserved it, whatever the term "twat" means to you :-)

industrial strength bitch slapping

LOL! Love it.

Poor Jimmy wants so desperately to believe that all people (with the exception of the Jooos) are good at heart that he is blind to the existence of real evil.

I give up on him. If he had stuck to working for Habitat for Humanity (a noble organization) and kept his imcompetent hands out of foreign policy, I would respect him. But I don't.

Yeah, hands off the noble lizardoid leader you twit/twat.

"Idiotarian of the Year" seems a little Jimmy-lite to me...When is the vote for "Seditious Traitor of the Year" take place?

And could we hold a raffle for the participating voters? The winner gets an all expense paid trip for one day in Ramallah and gets to personally trip the gallows floor. Second place wins two days in Ramallah and gets to watch the festivities...

Charles,

Please stop referring to Jimmah as an idiotarian. He can't be called such because he is the idiot-in-chief! He is idiot supreme! He is the king idiot!* All others simply aspire to be as idiotic as Jimmah the "Great".

If statesmanship was licensed by the state, Carter's permit would've been revoked long ago. I mean, the man was given the keys to run the US and he did his damnedest to destroy it...yeah, let's take his advice on how to run anything or anywhere.

Screw you Jimmy. Go to hell.

* Perhaps if he were eliminated, all the idiotarians would turn back into rational humans, a la the head vampire theory? Maybe letting John Hinckley out isn't such a bad idea after all.

Wake up Bushisajoker
The Lunacy has you
Follow the gray matter
Knock knock Bushisajoker

…

If you take the blue pill, the story ends. You go on believing whatever the LLL wants you to believe. But, if you take the red pill, you see just how deep our thought goes.

#132 Evariste's Zaide

mmm...snotgurgles

And I have used "twat" in that respect many times, a lot more often than "twit."

And Carter is truly not a bawcock. ;-)

From your article:

And by 2025, the BBC informs us, a third of the world will be Muslim.

Great, just great.

We ain't played Cowboys and Muslims yet.

The road to hell was paved by Jimmy Carter.

Wanna know how truly godawful Carter is?

Q (Ed McMahon): How bad IS he?

A: So bad that he turned me away from the Democratic Party for 12 years.

Carter's relentless insistence that the Palestinian cause was the only fucking thing that mattered in the whole wide world dealt a sledgehammer blow to the Democratic Party, from which it has still not recovered.

GoatGuy #95,

Thanks for the reply.

My pleasure, same to you, btw.

The "blinded by..." I was referring to was how some of the more fanatical factions are as determined to "take the whole" as the Paleo's are to push Israelis into the sea.

It's safe to say that those "more fanatical factions" on the Israeli side are 1) a tiny minority (based on electoral results) and 2) not the sort who take non-democratic actions, i.e. attacking Jordyptians without the government's say. There really isn't a parallel with the Jordyptians, where it's certain that it's not a tiny minority and (we're supposed to believe though I doubt) the Jordyptians are attacking in ways that are not centrally controlled by their government. (Again, I doubt that they are acting without Arafat's express authorization but that is what is supposedly happening.)

My goal was to say that neither side's fanatics have an argument of any significance that holds water against the opposite.

I don't know about that. Quite frankly, I'd say that the supposed "extremists" from the Israeli side have been right more often then not. Consider that the "extremist" Arutz Sheva was consistenly opposed to the Oslo peace farce, the Tenet, Mitchell, and Zini plans, etc. - and in every single instance, their position (that the Arab side could not be trusted) was vindicated by reality.

Coexistence - as improbable as that seems - is the only central ground that works.

I'm not sure, but you sound as though you're calling for a binational state. That does mean extermination of the Jewish proportion of the state, I'm sure that you're aware.

Coexistence is not possible. It's fundamentally akin to asking Jews in Germany to try to coexist with the Nazis; the analogy is not particularly far-fetched, as Arafat's uncle and mentor, Hajj Amin Al Husseini, was Hitler's friend and the "person" in charge of bringing the Final Solution to the Holy Land once it fell into Germany's hand.

Why should Jews be forced to coexist with their killers? Can you think of any other group that is forced to do so? Can you think of any situation in the history of the world where killers willingly gave up their weapons in favor of coexistence?

Not to say that "coexistence" can't be enforced with a big ol' snakey wall, mind you.

I'm really confused as to what your suggestion is, then. Perhaps you mean "unilateral separation", which amounts to Israel ceding territory to the murderers and hoping (really, really hard) that the Jordyptians will stop attacking them. I don't understand how this position distinguishes itself from Dhimmi Carter's position, except perhaps in magnitude.

Israel needs to gird itself well for the civil war that from what I can tell is all but unavoidable.

A war between two polities is not a civil war. But I agree that the cold war between the Israelis and the Arabs will only become worse and eventually (next five years I'd guess) become a hot war.

What they remember though is that the same peoples that were held by the UN to not invade them, did, and repeated the mistake a second (third, or even fourth) time - depending on your view of history.

Depends on who exactly you mean. The fact remains that Israel has faced fewer Arab countries in each war then in the previous one. (I suspect that this will change in the near future, but it does not change the fact that the Arab countries have tended to learn a lesson, at least until recently.)

They learned this lesson: we can never achieve a negotiated peace with our Islamic neighbors without first securing a whole passel of "honor" by beating the crap out of them on the battlefield. Then, and only then, will we get them to accede to this, that and the other kind of negotiated peace. And then ... ONLY in exchange for their war-lost lands, their real-estate-honor.

I'm not sure that I agree at all. There really is no evidence that giving back land has led peace on any of the fronts. Think of Egypt, which has violated just about every clause of the peace agreement from incitement, having an ambassador in Israel, to saying they would declare war on Israel if the Arab countries would give them $100B. Think of Lebanon, where Israel tried to simply give back the land in the hopes that things would stop - and now there is a new claim that even the UN thinks is bogus for the Shebaa Farms.

And then think of Jordan, where no land was given back by Israel, but there is pretty much a stable, peaceful situation.

No, if anything, Arab-Israeli relations consistenly show that when Israel acts like the stronger party (which it is) the Arabs respect that strength and don't try to make problems. It's only when Israel acts weak that the Arab try to strike.

Arafat still exists as the pointless mob-leader of the neoPalestinians because he truly reflects their 'body politic', their intransigence, their utter unwillingness taken faction by faction, to compromise, to release the Israelis from their indefinite war of attrition and terrorism.

So how does that square with your earlier statements about co-existence? If Arafat and the Jordyptians are intransigent (which I agree that they are), how can Israel ever expect to make peace along the lines that you suggest? No, the solution, as with the Nazis, is to beat their ideology out of them for the living ones and de-Nazify the educational system and media for the ones to come.

i can just see carter wearing a peanut vendor's apron at an atlanta braves game shouting at the top of his voice--"mounts--getcha temple mounts--rightcheer--get your temple mounts--you sir--like a temple mount?--the cost?--nothing much-- just overlooking two thousand years of history and heritage"--the dude had too much peanut porridge when he was a kid and worked too close to a nuclear reactor as a grown up--they should salt his sorry ass and feed him to the closest elephant!!

OT...

Body found at UN

Colt #98 - Sad but true.

#46 Ben F

Brookings Institution's Saban Center

Beilin wants to be the new Pink Power Ranger. Don't buy your kids Power Ranger merchandise for the holiday season.

Jimmy, please, stick to pounding nails and keep your mouth shut.

#133 Zulubaby
"whatever the term "twat" means to you :-)"

Okay. Just so long as you don't go substituting "Tits" for "ditz". LOL

Several people have praised Carter for his work with Habitat for Humanity. Sorry, it's not true. Carter uses a chartered airplane and takes a staff with him (plus the SS) when he goes to build a house. If he just gave the money he spends (no, I don't know where it comes from) the poor would be better off.

Since WHEN is Carter STUPID? Thats a crockand a half. He knows just what he has been doing. He and HIS friends. Remember them...? I do.

Now lets see now..He builds houses for Blacks in the South..so that gets him off the hook for trashing and LYING about Jews. Sounds like a "peachy" tactic to ME...Cover Jewish Antagonistic behavior with good works for OTHER people..hmmm

In my opinion..this former President of the United States of America has been an un-official AGENT for Americas Enemies- the Islamic World. He should be made to REGISTER as an Agent at the State Dept..just like James Baker. No different..In fact WORSE. I suggest we look at HIS particular Perks..and his wifes perks. Remember...Msss. Carter just hated having to leave the limelight and Washington and POWER. So did HE apparantely.

---
---

I saw Monica was again mentioned. She did what she did. Shame on her. Bad! Especially IF he didn't reciprocate..so to speak.. Im sick and tired of ONLY Monica being mentioned. Elinore Mondale..(what happened to the story on that?) Course if you PURPOSELY Dont Choose to look into the story... What WAS that actresses name who starred with John Ritter on a TV Sit Comedy? What happened to THAT story as well? Bupkas...nothing doing on that story..no interest, no investigation... Theres many others ya know!!! Not one night stands, but significant time pds spent with Bill...doing just what Monica did... and more.

Wonder if you all know who DEBRA MATHIS is? Just look her up in relation (you should excuse the expression) to Bill (I'm horny all the time) Clinton. Now why DONT you know who Debra Mathis is? and what has happened in her life? WHO will DARE to discuss Debra Mathis? No one..

While I agree with most folks here that Carter's horrible speech attacking Israel does make him the front runner
for the Idiotrarian Award for an unprecedented two years in a role, I must disagree with all those folks attacking Carter over his handling of the Iran hostage crisis. Yes it took over a year to do so, but Carter in the end did get all the hostages out of Iran. A rescue attempt was tried and failed with the deaths of 8 American Servicemen. The Iranians did not get anything in returning the hostages besides their money that has been frozon by the US after the hostage crisis began.

Reagan, by contrast, had better then 250 Marines killed by a sucide terrorist in Lebanon and did not take any effective retailation and soon pulled the Marines out entirely. To get folks attention away from this debacle Reagan invaded Grenada, an island in the Carribean that no one had ever heard of!
Kiddies, Can you spell Wag the Dog?
(Pause)
I knew you could!
In 1986/7 Reagan Adminstration proceeded to swap arms for American hostages being held in Lebanon. The predictable happened. For every hostage released, another one was taken. Reagan managered to destroy whatever was left of America's creditability concerning hostages.

OT: Bush Jr.'s Thanksgiving Day stopever in Baghdad was nice. It would have been a lot more effective if he had stayed a day or so visited the troops around Baghdad and other Iraqi cities; gotten a first hand look at the situation and maybe even have some meaningful talks with real Iraquis. By going there in great secrecy and then leaving after only a few hours, Bush contradicted all his administration's talk abou how secure Iraq was! Effect was to strengthen the arguements of critics that Iraq, even Baghdad was not safe or secure.

The sad part about the Geneva crap is that it repeats history over and over again. No one seems interested in learning that the Palestinians really are implacable. We keep making the same mistakes again, assuming that this time things are different.

The political divisions get me worried too:
'What Palestinians do agree about is the utility of the exercise: "One of the goals of the Geneva Accord is to create a rift in the Israeli street and a crack in the Sharon government," said Qadura Fares, an Accord architect who is going [to today's Swiss launch].

For students of history, Jewish leadership and power was likewise divided during the Great Revolt against Roman rule. At the beginning, under a unified leadership, the Jews were successful. Then as fringe groups went their own ways and undermined any central power, everything fell apart and Jews were murdering Jews for control. The Romans had a much mush easier time of it after that.

Speaking of the IoY award, when do the polls open? When do we get to start submitting nominations?

You can say one thing for Jimmy C.

He is consistent.

#154 Josh
"For students of history, Jewish leadership and power was likewise divided during the Great Revolt against Roman rule. At the beginning, under a unified leadership, the Jews were successful. Then as fringe groups went their own ways and undermined any central power, everything fell apart and Jews were murdering Jews for control. The Romans had a much mush easier time of it after that."

You're spot on.
"6 Jews = 7 opinions" used to be funny.
Not any more.

In the final analysis, the one thing needed for Israel to win the peace (and security) is UNITY. Having allies would be nice but, if push came to shove, Israel could do it alone. She will eventually, anyway.
Or cease to exist. I won't countenance that thought for a moment.

#153

Carter in the end did get all the hostages out of Iran

This is the first time in my life I've heard someone assert that Carter got them out, unless you mean he got them out by graciously failing to be reelected. They were released the day Reagan was inagurated, not because of anything Carter did, but to embarass Carter who was unable to do anything.

James (#158) I believe if you consult any history of the hostage crisis, you will see that Carter gets the credit for getting the hostages out of Iraq.

I think that Carter's ideas, including his endorsement of the Saudi initiative, would make Israel and Israelis more vulnerable.

(1) Make Judea and Samaria judenrein? Iran will have nuclear weapons. The Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria are more difficult to wipe out in a nuclear strike, and would form Israel's surviving "country B" after a nuclear strike. Their elimination beforehand would be an inducement to a nuclear Iran to strike Israel's main population centers -- Tel Aviv, Haifa, and west Jerusalem.

(2) Israel's borders are pulled back to the 1949 armistice line (the Green Line)? Israel would then have a neck only about 9 miles wide. This would be an inducement to the Arab states to wipe out Israel by conventional weapons. It would be a return to the conditions of 1967 when Nasser said: "Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel." (Egypt's Pres. Nasser, May 27, 1967, nine days before the start of the 1967 war.)

(3) The flooding of Israel with 4 million descendants of Arab refugees (per the Saudi initiative)? Israel would become lebanized. Civil war would rage. There would be terrorism on a scale that dwarfed the present terrorism. Israel would become another Arab state.

(4) Israel stops building the anti-terrorist security fence, and takes down the portions it has built? Terrorist capabilities would be increased many times over, compared to their capabilities if there is a security fence. No suicide bombings have originated in Gaza, which has a fence; but without a fence, the suicide bombing rate would explode to the levels that existed during the first 3 years of Intifada II.

In a way, I hope he gets lots of media coverage so that everyone can remember why we don't elect Democrats more often.

But, the gain is not worth the pain.

Jimmeh, shut up!

#159 David All

James (#158) I believe if you consult any history of the hostage crisis, you will see that Carter gets the credit for getting the hostages out of Iraq.

That's a new one to me.

Has anyone else seen Carter get credit for his (mis)handling of the crisis?

This is another example of the unprincipled dhimmitude of the left and the Democrats. There use to be an tradition that a former president did not criticize a sitting president's policies and actions. Can anyone recall Bush I, Reagan, Ford, or Nixon doing what Carter and Clinton have done?

Carter, who was once a officer in the submarine service has truly earned the derogatory name applied to submariners by their fellow sailors,...

BUBBLEHEAD

#153 David All 12/1/2003 04:56PM PST
... Reagan, by contrast, had better then 250 Marines killed by a sucide terrorist in Lebanon and did not take any effective retailation and soon pulled the Marines out entirely. To get folks attention away from this debacle Reagan invaded Grenada, an island in the Carribean that no one had ever heard of! ...

Ah. you must be one of the Democratic Party's 'Moderates'. You actually spew your invective in whole sentences, instead of poster slogans.
You also show the usual trait of equivocation, or comparing / contrasting events to 'prove' that your target is 'just as bad'.
And like the run of the mill LLLoon, you do so wholly bereft of any real context and with the failed 'logic' of equating all actions at all times (again) irregardless of Context.

Reagan.
Immediate release of US Embassy hostages by Iran on the eve of his inauguaration, after Jimmy Carter let them rot for 444 DAYS..
Cold War. '89 collapse of Sovs, Berlin Wall, etc. The side actions in Lebanon, Grenada, Afghani Mujahadeen (REAL ones, not the Osama Traveling Murder Show) backing were each important in each theatre, but the Cold War and the bankrupting of Communism in the West was THE Context and prime achievement of the Reagan Presidency.
You are an over-politicized Idiot / Idealogue, if you think less. Hope you lapped up the CBS / Showtime propaganda show on Reagan.

And lastly, you've got the BALLS to trot out 'Wag the Dog'?? Go read about Operation Fox, a 100day punitive campaign / escalation of the Iraq campaign, ordered by Clinton to be launched on almost the VERY HOUR his Impeachment Hearings began.
If Bill Clinton hadn't been wagging HIS dog in front of Monica's dress, he wouldn't have ordered the firing of $2.6 BILLION dollars worth of misiles / bombs and every sewage plant, electric utility, and water purification plant in Iraq wouldn't have been destroyed.
Shove your 'wag the dog'.

doh.

Carter's mother Miss Lilian is alleged to have said reagrding her children "I wish I reamianed a virgin."

Jimmy Carter is stupid, is weak, is malevolent, is anti Semitic, is vicious, is a traitor, and is a bitter old man. I hope that a baby grand piano falls out of the sky and kills him. I was born during the Eisnehower Administration and Carter is by far the worst President in my lifetime. Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton are the Revenge of the Confederacy. The man never met a tyrant that he did not want to grovel to. Witness his groveling before the reprehensible Kim Il-Sung and his hideous son Kim Jong-Il.

It is unfair to compare this odious disgrace of a man to Neville Chamberlain. Chamberlain, in the last years of his life, learned from his errors and became a good soldier in Churchill's cabinet. The capacity to learn from error is one of the hallmarks of leadership. Carter completely lacks that ability. That he was President is frightening. He is an enemy of Israel as much as any thug from the United Nations.

David #153 - you are dead wrong on this one. As #158 pointed out, the hostages were not released until after Reagan was sworn in, in part to humiliate Carter and in part because Reagan rightly said that the seizure of hostages was an act of war and would be treated as such.
I watched Hodding Carter III and Ted Koppell on Nightline almost every night during those 444 days. It was absolutely pathetic and Carter's inability to act forcefully was the first time the Islamics realized they could spit in our faces and get away with it. He is the ultimate appeaser, and his paralysis was indirectly responsible for the mess we're in now, not Israel or Bush.

Don't forget that this is the same person who said last year that there could be peace in the Middle East if it weren't for "Israel's inability to get along with its neighbors." As if it is Israel's fault that its "neighbors" have been in a perpetual state of war with it for 55 years and won't even refer to it by name.

He is an absolute disgrace, and he should be arrested upon his return to the states and tried for treason.

#144 / Ariel ~

And I thank you, good sparring partner for quite a reply. I look forward to many a conversation.

I'm afraid you've identified a certain duplicitous ring to my argument. (i.e. "touché"). Truth is - I'm trying as hard as hell to keep from being automarginalized by a one-sided, one-view discourse. Ahem... (note to self) Its not working.

Let me try it from this angle:

Quite true as you point out, the Arabs respect negotiation from a position of strength (which first the French, then the Brits, then/now America brings). America seems to be the 'theologically neutral' party holding the diplomatic bag, so to speak. The Arafat-lead neoPalestinians are hell-bent to emulate Nazi's at every turn. The Jews regularly get 98-to-4 UN votes against whatever action they engage to defend their sovereignty - in the classic nation-state sense. The UN seems really to never have intended to uphold its Israeli "right to exist" resolutions passed in the late 1950's, early 1960's.

Yet (and I'm not real good at the techno-political speach, so forgive me, please), the very definition of the classic nation-state is its ability to defend its borders, its people, its system of governance, its position in the world politic, as well as the world economic forum. Israel, regardless of its history, has managed to do that pretty handily since 1947 or thereabouts. Berman, Hanson and others point to the fact that the neoPalestinians are the very antithesis of a 'nation state' in that they're essentially pitching the world politic to "award it to them", for no particularly worthy reason, except that

(a) the UN's utterly compromised politico's are feeling remorseful for giving into Europe at the end of WW2, setting up a national homeland for the Zionists

(b) the Palestinian "problem" is a touchstone, a kind of political "currency" that countries small and large can use against the single world Hyperpower, with little fallout in the UN, and internally

(c) the neoPalestinians are pretty good at whipping up a lot of need-for-diplomacy ... which employs hundreds if not thousands of groupies, meeting rooms, permanent offices in the UN, yada yada.

Well, I guess Israel had its "state" awarded to them, when they still weren't ready to make it their own. Didn't take them too long to get it together, and at this point Israel clearly carries the social, military, economic and educational upper hand. I think that the neoPalestinians would not end up so tidily positioned. Truth seems, they're scions, suckers of an unusual sort, even amongst Arab countries. No oil, nothing to export, very little to "go see", about the size of the San Francisco Bay Area (with about the same population), yet they want to be a sovereign country. I'm sure the UN would provide an amazing amount of 'seed' money to get them going. But is it enough? Where exactly is the cultural center of the neoPalestinians? Answer - it don't exist, really.
- - - -
Well... I just re-read all that, and it was pretty fruitless. I'm sorry.

I prefer your points, though -

[1] the tiny minority of Jewish radicals is more right than wrong, and they generally take more peacible means to gain their ends,

[2] there is little-to-no possibility that any kind of dual-nation-in-one-border solution will work (and yes, I agree it essentially means the eventual demographic ouster of the Jews from their homeland),

[3] that "giving back land" didn't really probably increase the chance of winning longer-term stability arrangements with the neighbors (although it did ameliorate the perception in the UN, and did alleviate to some degree the quick-to-curdle idea that Israel was the aggressor, and then backfired as you might have pointed out - the ceding of war-won land now being used as rhetoric to 'prove' that it was "stolen", etc.),

[4] that there is no negotiating with the motley crew that constitutes the band of neofascists and brigands that wishes to continue its worthless, warring, parasitic existence with the ample and fond admiration of every last fat-headed oil-hungry non-participant in the world.

Then again, I could be wrong. Its happened at least once. LOL. Looking forward to your replies.

GoatGuy

Extremely sorry ... forgot to "balance my italics" - GG

"...Israeli and Palestinian extremists will prevail."

Oh really, Jimmy? Explain to me against just how it is that BOTH sets of "extremists" could possibly prevail at the same time?

Dumbass.

#162 James 12/1/2003 05:25PM PST
Has anyone else seen Carter get credit for his (mis)handling of the crisis?

The only 'credit' I've seen Dhimmi get is that for presiding for four years over a US military that was so badly gutted by the last few years of Vietnam, that the Iran hostage rescue attempt was completely FUBAR.

and David All, if you are spouting nonsense like THAT (Jimmy responsible for their freedom), I'd LOVE to see your history books. Explains a helluva lot about your nonsense.

(and thanks to Charles for the correction of Bold-Gate)

kahtuh,

Go cradle your 'peace' prize in fetal position, eat some EU peanuts, and be careful not to choke on your own communistic vomit.

This issue is way above and beyond you, obviously. I know, the poor (baby, children, innocent civilian killing) palies are the victims who need protection from the "world" (gag) police, and the big bad Israel gubmint is the bad guys, eh?

Yeah, let's just NEGOTIATE till every being on earth turns blue... We must appease the terrorists...
NOT!!!

Re: #41 Renna- (bottom of linked article)

"When I was married at the age of 22 and relishing an active sex life, I assumed that this was a pleasure that my middle-aged parents rarely, if ever, enjoyed. Now, well past 70, Rosalynn and I have learned to accommodate each other’s desires more accurately and generously, and have never had a more complete and enjoyable relationship." - "The Virtues of Aging" by Jimmy Carter.

#174 Baldy

I remember reading that when Nordlinger published it in the Carterpalooza article. I almost spewed my coffee. The thought of that wizened, wrinkled old man porking Rosalynn, yecch!

#17 ak 12/1/2003 02:00PM PST

Screw J.C. IMHO he's another fossil, just like arafish... that refuses to cross the "rainbow bridge".

Valhalla is for Heroes. Hunting and fighting all day. Drinking and wenching all night. I respectfully suggest that Mr. Carter wouldn't be welcome there, unless someone's misplaced the pells :).

GTC

I am still happy that I was old enough to vote for Ronald Reagan in 1980.

Another of Jimmy's stupid ideas:
If I'm not mistaken, he banned the playing of "Hail to the Chief", but had to reinstate it's playing when no one noticed he was in the room.

The Carters and SEX...OH MA GAWD!!! Its too disgusting to contemplate. EEK. YUCK OOO.

Seriously, when did it become OK for former Presidents of the US to become an Unregistered LOBBYIST for enemies of the US? Is this now OK? And why is it OK?

I think it would be a good idea to sort of find out how Jimmah's life has changed since he became the "Trophy Spokesman" for most of Islam. Let his life style ..his real life style be examined and the light shone on it. I bet most Americans wouldn't like whats going on there. How DOES he live..what goodies does he get...how much money HAS he made??? Betcha something not Kosher is going on there...no matter how it is STRUCTURED. Hmmm? Is he two steps from being a TRAITOR to the US? I think hes closer than that!

This is an incredible breech of etiquete. I'm wondering how many of our tax dollars Jimmy Carter sucks off us each year so he can go to foreign countries and criticize the sitting president.

GTC

I think Fox should start a new series, "Soon-to-be Ex-Americans". All Americans get to vote on who to "kick off the island"! Thanks to the past six months, I'd place my first vote for Jimmy Carter. This pathetic excuse for a human being even got me to STOP donating to Habitat for Humanity, an organization that I used to think was well-intentioned, even if a little deluded.

I think Jimmy carries a little more from Georgia than we give him credit for, including some flavor the the KKK. His anti-Israel (and in the current state of the world equivalent to anti-Jew) stance along with no doubt a fundamentalist evangelical interpretation of the Bible ("the Jews killed Jesus so it's my duty to punish them") has stripped away my delusion that there's anything holy about this man. Rotten to the core. Just as Neville Chamberlain doomed millions by refusing to stop Hitler when he could have been stopped, so too does Carter carry the blood of innocents on his hands for his mindless, sick, and cowardly intrusions into affairs he doesn't understand.

First, vote for Carter for a second year in a row on Charles' list, then vote to toss the idiot of the island (and save America the money we're wasting on his Secret Service protection).

#174 Baldy

"When I was married at the age of 22 and relishing an active sex life, I assumed that this was a pleasure that my middle-aged parents rarely, if ever, enjoyed. Now, well past 70, Rosalynn and I have learned to accommodate each other’s desires more accurately and generously, and have never had a more complete and enjoyable relationship." - "The Virtues of Aging" by Jimmy Carter.

My mind will never recover. ::shudder::

And no, I'm not dissing evangelical Christians. I do get tired, however, of those who read the Bible likes it's some literal text, similar to the way the Wahabis interpret the Koran (and almost as destructive).

174 Baldy

I JUST FINISHED EATING

AND NOW I AM GAGGING

aaarghhh

Sorry, my typing is usually a little more accurate, but my anger got the best of me.

And to think America has been bamboozled into thinking it's Reagan that is suffering from Alzheimer's!

In defence of the old Peanut Farmer:

In my salad days when I was green, I moved to New York. I was living in the City in the late 1970�s when Jimmy Carter was president of the United States. I was not innocent of that regime. My mother had been a major fund raiser for him in Ohio, and a picture of her and Carter in front of our house was a featured prominently in my office. I, a standard issue middle of the road liberal, applauded her efforts and voted for the ole peanut farmer.

Now I do not remember whether I took my medicine this morning, but like most geezers, I remember the ancient past, with startling clarity. What I remember most is how quickly Carter brought the country to the brink of ruin. Not only did he bring American power into such disrepute that he was unable to prevent, or respond to, one of the most egregious breaches of diplomatic propriety in all of history, but he also brought the Treasury to the edge of bankruptcy.

In 1979, my office overlooked the corner of 6th Avenue and 47th Street, and I can still see the lines of people selling jewelry when gold soared over $650/oz. When it hit $800 the Federal Reserve could have paid off its liabilities, which are dollars (check the green paper in your wallet), and liquidated solvent. (True story, I bought our wedding rings on the day gold peaked, I call it a bargain, the best I ever had) I recall reading an article in the paper about Poland and the misery that communism had brought to it, and thinking "my God, we are headed into the same pit." These experiences helped to transform me into the hard core right winger I am today. So I guess I owe some thanks to Jimmy.

#186 Robert Schwartz:

Gee, then I owe the guy who smacked me in the face with brass knucks in high school big thanks for teaching me to duck when somebody taps me on the shoulder!

I still remember buying my first house just after Jimmuh the peanut warehouseman had been run out of office; I'm sure the interest rate is considered usury today.

Jimmy the racist. As other posters have pointed out, projection is witnessed on a regular basis in the political world. Given Jimmy's actions, I'd say his accusation of racism against Reagan (Reagan, Lott, and Race Baiting) is a case of deep-seated racism in Jimmy himself. Maybe he learned to compensate and atone for an inherited bigotry against blacks, but it sure doesn't seem like he ever shook off the inherited bigotry against Jews.

From the above link:

* Little time was wasted in accusing Reagan not simply of pandering to old-fashioned segregationist sentiment in the south, but of actively sympathizing with it. Patricia Harris, Carter's secretary of Health and Human Services, told a steelworkers' union conference in early August: "I will not attempt to explain why the KKK found the Republican candidate and the Republican platform compatible with the philosophy and guiding principles of that notorious organization."

* Harris added, when Reagan speaks before black audiences many blacks "will see the specter of a white sheet behind him."

* Andrew Young went even further, saying that Reagan's remarks seemed "like a code word to me that it's going to be all right to kill n--- when he's President."

* Coretta Scott King managed to top Young: "I am scared that if Ronald Reagan gets into office, we are going to see more of the Ku Klux Klan and a resurgence of the Nazi Party."

* Maryland Congressman Parren Mitchell, a leader of the Congressional Black Caucus, said that " Reagan represents a distinct danger to black Americans."

The above statements were made during the Carter-Reagan pre-election battles.

Take a look at Melanie's blog for some additional insight into our great statesman Jimmy Carter.

Hmmm, you'd think the Palestinians would have seen how well this argument worked for Saddam:

Palestinians on Verge of Humanitarian Catastrophe

For openers, Ziegler reports that the Occupied Palestinian Territory is “on the verge of humanitarian catastrophe, as the result of extremely harsh military measures that the occupying Israeli military forces have imposed in response to the outbreak of the second intifada in September 2000..”

Does this sound familiar to The US is killing tens of thousands of Iraqi children because of the cruel sanctions? AND NOT ONE WORD after the war about how many foodstuffs could have been purchased with the BILLION dollars Saddam and his crew drove off with as the bombs were falling.

Funny, all those poor Palestinians seem able to afford "toy" guns by the bushel full for their kids! But maybe they're just being realistic: you don't need to feed human shields well-balanced meals!

Forgive me for the Carter sex-talk. I loved Ripley's Believe or Not! when I was a kid, it de-sensitized me to shriveled humans.

#187

We too bought a house in April of 1980. The first mortgage commitment we signed was at 17%. We got it down to 13.5% by the time we closed in late summer. We moved once after that and refinanced a bunch of times. We are now at 5.75%.

You learn your lesson and move on. Carter turned the Republican party over to Reagan.

No one is completely usless, he can always be a bad example.

I'm sure it's only a matter of time that he reminds us that Jesus of Nazareth was a carpenter too and that they share the same initials.
Insufferable!
Find a large, remote pasture for this guy.

Whenever Carter speaks, I can't help but picture George from 'Seinfeld' yelling, "I am Costanza! King of the Idiots!"

I am constantly amazed by Jimma's stupidity. How can anyone be so spineless?

I think we should just award Jimmah a lifetime achievement idiotarian award, or else he's gonna monopolise the yearly awards until he croaks.

He clearly missed his calling. Jimmy Carter should have been a parish vicar in a small village where he could have spent his time 'caring' for the poor & writing sermons to extort money from the richer parishoners. He would probably never have met real evil & could have lived in his mental utopia with nothing to distort his world view without causing damage to anyone.

The fact he has lived his life on the world stage & has some power & influence means he has caused havoc.

The Devil's greatest trick is to convince people he doesn't exist.

Theres this Template on how to get away with Antisemitism. Heres how ya do it. You devote yourself to ANY OTHER minority (pick one) and when antisemitic cr*p falls out of your mouth, disguised as an Anti Israel
stance, then you are inoculated against the charge and you are home free.

Remember Marlon Brando and his remarks about Jews?...Well..course Marlon WASN'T AntiSemetic..cause "some of his best friends..blah blah blah..(thats an OLD one) AND he works for NATIVE AMERICANS. So he couldnt possibly be a Racist OR an Antisemite. Course not.

As for Jimmah and his whole family...notice while the whole world was in LOVE with Israel during the 60s HIS family wasn't interested. None of em were. They seemed to ignore Israel (at best) in public and used their time to help anyone BUT Israel. It was a unique time in America for appreciating Israel..this family DIDN'T. Interesting..cause it DOES say something. They were activists --their heart bled--but NOT for Israel and Jews. Remember at the beginning of the Sixties..it was only 15 years from the Camps...not all that long.

Just heard the end of a segment on Pat Robertson's show yesterday. A woman (dont know who she was) said: Israel represents The Jews That Got Away..(from the ovens) to the World. I think that is RIGHT ON.

Someone else described Israel as the newest "Colletive Jew"...and the reaction towards Israel by many reflects that attitude.

Andrew Young? Dont even want to discuss THAT bastard. You all know who he is and what HE instituted following the directions Carter. They have blood on their hands...on all sides..Americans, Pals, Israelis, Christians, Moslems, Jews, everyone. They ENABLED and Legitimized the Terrorist movement.

GoatGuy #169,

And I thank you, good sparring partner for quite a reply. I look forward to many a conversation.

Me too. Are you new here? I've been away for a little while, so I might not have seen you when you first showed up. Where are you from? There's something in the way you write that suggests international...

I'm trying as hard as hell to keep from being automarginalized by a one-sided, one-view discourse. Ahem... (note to self) Its not working.

Sometimes one side is right.

Yet (and I'm not real good at the techno-political speach, so forgive me, please)

No need to ask forgiveneness, we're all amateurs here.

the very definition of the classic nation-state is its ability to defend its borders, its people, its system of governance, its position in the world politic, as well as the world economic forum. Israel, regardless of its history, has managed to do that pretty handily since 1947 or thereabouts.

Agreed. Essentially, when people attack Israel's right to exist, one has to wonder why any other nation has a "right to exist" and exactly who hands out this "right". Since G-d hasn't made himself apparent, there really isn't a supranational authority that the citizens of the world have given the right to create nations to.

I couldn't agree more with your reasons about why the Jordyptians are being considered for having a state given to them, though I'd add: d) oil interests combined with totalitarian states which want an external issue to distract their populace.

Well, I guess Israel had its "state" awarded to them, when they still weren't ready to make it their own.

Sort of. The UN resolution that "created" Israel was a GA resolution, i.e. nonbinding. So de facto, Israel was created in pretty much the same way as any other country - by being able to create a polity that can defend itself.

I think that the neoPalestinians would not end up so tidily positioned. Truth seems, they're scions, suckers of an unusual sort, even amongst Arab countries. No oil, nothing to export, very little to "go see", about the size of the San Francisco Bay Area (with about the same population), yet they want to be a sovereign country. I'm sure the UN would provide an amazing amount of 'seed' money to get them going. But is it enough?

No, the UN would not provide them money. It's not in the UN's interest to fund Jordyptians who aren't involved in killing Israelis, who, depending on the UN person in question, are America's proxy or are the controllers of America. The UN only provides them money, currently, to keep them in misery. Consider that the UNRWA has spent billions (literally) on the "refugees" over fifty years - if 10% of this money had been spent on resettling "refugees", there would be no more "refugees".

You are exactly right about the Jordyptians - they have been created by their Arab "brothers" to be nothing more then the group which distracts the populace in the Arab countries so that they don't focus on how bad their lives are and take it out on the government. Fascism 101 in action.

[1] the tiny minority of Jewish radicals is more right than wrong, and they generally take more peacible means to gain their ends,

Not just "generally". The Jewish "radicals" almost universally follow peacable means to their ends. (I can think of one or two exceptions in the last ten years and perhaps one or two more in the last fifty.)

[2] there is little-to-no possibility that any kind of dual-nation-in-one-border solution will work (and yes, I agree it essentially means the eventual demographic ouster of the Jews from their homeland),

Not just the demographic ouster. If you look, for example, at Bethlehem, administered by the PA for most of the Oslo farce, the population of Christians has diminished during the Oslo period from around half to about 2%. And that isn't because of demographics. It's because the Muslim Jordyptians rape their women, steal from their stores, and generally make life difficult - so many of them leave.

Long-term, demographics are an issue as well.

[3] that "giving back land" didn't really probably increase the chance of winning longer-term stability arrangements with the neighbors (although it did ameliorate the perception in the UN, and did alleviate to some degree the quick-to-curdle idea that Israel was the aggressor, and then backfired as you might have pointed out - the ceding of war-won land now being used as rhetoric to 'prove' that it was "stolen", etc.),

I suppose if there was a gain to Israel giving back the land it was, as you pointed out, that Israel could not be seen as an aggressor by a fair-minded person. Net-net, I'd say Israel should have kept the Sinai - particularly for its oil resources, strategic location, and beach resorts.

[4] that there is no negotiating with the motley crew that constitutes the band of neofascists and brigands that wishes to continue its worthless, warring, parasitic existence with the ample and fond admiration of every last fat-headed oil-hungry non-participant in the world.

Agreed.

Then again, I could be wrong. Its happened at least once. LOL. Looking forward to your replies.

We've all been wrong. The only important thing is that we learn from our mistakes. I was once on the left - but I've learned that that's a mistake.

Yes, zulubaby, I know what you mean.

For the rest of you, I'd link to pictures (to... demonstrate what "twat" means), but I think Charles might have a problem with it.

Ariel - thank you. "Nuff said"

GoatGuy

When folks curse you and scream and shout and do not refute your arguements, you know that you hit a sensitive area and it hurts.

Whether Carter or Reagan or both deserve the credit for getting the hostages out of Iran is debatable and for arguement's sake, let us suggest that Reagan freightened the Iranians into releasing the hostages. I am curious, exactly, what steps would you who are so critical of Carter have done to have gotten the hostages out? The rescue attempt that was done failed partly due to bad luck, the sandstorms on the way to desert one, but also due to the JCS planning the mission the way a machine politician hands out the party patronage, every service had a have a piece of the pie.

As for Reagan, yes the Afghan Mujahadeen(including Bin Ladeen) were responsible for driving the Soviets out of Afgahistan and the US backing of them, started by Carter was important. Cannot see how allowing 250 or so Marines being blowed up in Beirut without any effective retailation and then swapping arms to Iran for hostages did anything besides making the Islamic terrorists convinced we were weak. And yes, invading a small island in the Carribean that nobody had ever heard of two days after the massacre of the Marines in Beirut is Wag the Dog. If the folks who were frothering and foaming have any constructive arguements to make that Beirut was not a disaster and Grenada somehow had an effect on toppling the Soviet Union, please feel free to respond, sensible this time.

Looks like nobody wanted to argue any further. Guess I get the last word!
PS: Rayra the Aviator ... , watch out about those ranting and ravings. You could burst a blood vessel you know.